IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 18.08.2023 Date of Hearing: 16.10.2025 Date of Decision: 27.02.2026 FIRST APPEAL NO. 423/2023 IN THE MATTER OF THE POST MASTER, DEPARTMENT OF POST, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI GPO, NEW DELHI-110001.

(Through: Ms. Reena Rawat, Advocate)

…Appellant VERSUS MR. S.C. KAPOOR, D-322, VASANT APARTMENT, DELHI ROAD, GURGAON-122001.

(Through: Mr. Lalit Arora, Public Relation Inspector, New Delhi GPO)

…Respondent CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (FEMALE)

Present: Ms. Reena Rawat and Mrs. Ashish Bhatt, counsel for the Appellant.

Mr. Lalit Arora, Public Relation Inspector, New Delhi GPO, Respondent in person.

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL,PRESIDENT

JUDGMENT

1. The facts of the case as per District Commission record are as under:

“1.1 (Introduction to case of parties) - This complaint was filed on 25.10.2018 by narrating that the complainant/insured is consumer and he had obtained two Postal Life Insurance policies (PLI-P) from OPs/Insurers. Moreover, in January 2013, he had also taken two loans against security of two PLI policies to meet need of education of his children. The interest on loan was payable half yearly in June and December of each year. He had been paying half yearly interest regularly on those loan accounts from June 2013 to June 2016 (i.e. seven times interest was paid on each loan). Hence, he decided to repay the loan amount, he went to Post Office and at PLI- counter he was advised that in the computer system there is an outstanding loan in one account is of principal amount Rs.1,42,553/-+ interest of Rs.5940- Rs.1,48,493/-. In other loan account an outstanding loan is of principal amount Rs.90,161/- + Rs.3757/- Rs.93,818/. The total outstanding amount advised was Rs.2,42,411/- (Later-on these amounts were confirmed in RTI also). Then complainant had requested that he had been paying the interest regularly and outstanding amount would be lesser than the amount advised, but the complainant was asked that system would accept the amount being shown and no other amount in order to repay the loan and to close loan accounts.

The complainant was constraint to deposit the amount advised and amount was paid in cash. However, it was revealed that instead of seven times deposits of Interest, the system was not updated from time to time and loan accounts were updated five times only instead of seven times, an excess amount of Rs.43,453/- was got deposited from him. Moreover, an unnecessary bias and one sided inquiry was ordered for deposit of amount in cash, complainant's ITRs were called, which were furnished showing deposit of amount and income tax authorities were also informed by OPs to harass the complainant, whereas there was notification to deposits the amount for PLI; there were crores of rupees deposited as premium/instalments under PLI throughout the country. The Policy bonds were also not released despite repeated requests and entire loan amount was repaid. There is deficiency of services, unfair trade practice, harassment and agony by OPs.

That is why the complainant seeks direction against OPs (a) to pay/refund the excess loan amount got deposited as Rs. 43,453/- with interest @, 18% pa from the date of deposit i.e. 12.11.2016 (b) release the two original policy bonds because of re-payment of entire loan amount; (c) to pay compensation/damages of Rs. 18 lakhs for causing physical strain, mental torture, fabricated complaint, one sided enquiry, threats to file FIRs by the officers of OPs; by taking into consideration complainant's status of OPs' departmental employee and trauma of mental agony suffered by him during the last two years, (d) to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- and (e) appropriate penalty for causing torture to complainant.

1.2. Whereas all the OPs opposed the complaint on all counts that neither there is any deficiency of services nor unfair trade practice or any mala- fide, r